There are several things I do every time i start a game, edits I make for myself and the AI. They are personal ones just for me, I don't rush over here and ask or plead those changes be added to an OPTION panel on the game. That is what edit and modification threads are for. Just because you personally like some modification to the game does not equate to a demand to have it added as a feature to the game.

Several of the current requests for features irritate me no end, they add complexity and layers of rules I simply do not want. And then of course the usual defense or attack of me is, "you are a fan boy" Which is ignorant as hell cause I have made a few requests for changes myself. Things we can not do with the editor.

I agree. Some of the responses in the request threads are really something that can be done with the editor as is. Forcing them apon people is something that should not be taken lightly. Other requests, like requests for new editor functions are frowned upon, as people sometimes think they are meant to change the overall game. It is very frustrating that someone says, oh this will ruin the game, when you make a comment about something that cannot be editted and you only want it as an option in the editor. Alas, not all people are equally gifted...

Feature requests/improvement suggestions/bug reports, etc. are part of what any game forum is all about. ATG is what it is today because of a lot of that kind of activity in the AT forums. Some of the additional improvements in ATG since its release are a result of that kind of activity over the last couple of years. Vic takes it all in and considers what is possible and not possible and if it fits in with his vision for the game. The beauty of the ATG system is that some of those changes are only built into the different modules (i.e. generic (standard ATG), generic2 (altGfx maps), anewdawn (officers) and classic (original AT). Are there other things I'd like to see? Yes. Are there some things I think need toned down? Yes, cavalry in-particular as it seems to me overly powerful and has changed how ATG is played to a degree. Bottom-line: we can all thank Vic for an outstanding game system and all the gamers who share ideas about what they would like to see. Any game developer worth his salt absolutely loves feedback. That is simply how games evolve. Can it be overdone? Yes but I think Vic is very measured in what he adds/changes. I know he is always listening to gamer feedback and even encourages it.

Nicely put Webizen, and I especially agree with; "Vic is very measured in what he adds/changes" Yes there have been changes but no gamechangers. I totally agree with the cavalry thing too, probably a bit too overpowered I tend not to produce them anymore after initial stages but they sure prove to be a deadly force till the end of the game.

Along these lines, when the "leaders" bit was being proposed as a new feature being added to ATG, it was my request and hope that they would end up being optional changes. My question is, if I upgrade to the latest patch, am I stuck with officers games only ? I have not updated ATG since before the officers patch and won't if I cannot easily switch off the officers mods. Can someone who has it running tell me if it's possible to avoid officers with the latest patch ?

Several of the current requests for features irritate me no end, they add complexity and layers of rules I simply do not want. And then of course the usual defense or attack of me is, "you are a fan boy" Which is ignorant as hell cause I have made a few requests for changes myself. Things we can not do with the editor.

I appreciate your opinion but please do not suggest that everyone be denied additional complexity because YOU do not want it. I can play AT/ATG at almost any level of complexity I choose and I love to have all sorts of new features. I makes me happy, not irritated to no end. I mean we can go back to playing with pebbles in the dirt with the odd stick for complexity if we wish.

_____________________________

"Patriotism: Your conviction that this country is superior to all other countries because you were born in it." - George Bernard Shaw

Several of the current requests for features irritate me no end, they add complexity and layers of rules I simply do not want. And then of course the usual defense or attack of me is, "you are a fan boy" Which is ignorant as hell cause I have made a few requests for changes myself. Things we can not do with the editor.

I appreciate your opinion but please do not suggest that everyone be denied additional complexity because YOU do not want it. I can play AT/ATG at almost any level of complexity I choose and I love to have all sorts of new features. I makes me happy, not irritated to no end. I mean we can go back to playing with pebbles in the dirt with the odd stick for complexity if we wish.

Take for example the request that manpower become a part of official ATG. That completely changes the game. Supply is the means by which one controls the absolute size of a nation now, with raw and oil working to limit non infantry production. ( and I accept raw and oil, but they radically changed the game as well.)

One can use a mod to add manpower if they really want to cripple their capabilities. Yet we have people asking that it be added officially.

Or the mod that allows detailed commerce type raiding or movement of goods. Neither have been asked to be added as official but that is just a delay, someone will ask. They all radically change the tactics, the strategy and the economy of the game.

You want more complexity? Use the editor to your hearts content, that is what it is for. I do not. And we already have 4 official versions. Just how many can there be and how much support can Vic give to such a number of official versions?

Personally I have purchased this game 3 times. I would hate to have to leave it because others demand unneeded official changes.

You want complexity? There is an editor for that. with numerous people making modifications for your complexity.

One of the first things I do with any solitaire game I play is edit all kingdoms so that they can produce supply in enemy cities. My personal opinion is that is how it should be, have I made a thread and demanded that be put back in? NO I use the edit function for that.

Enjoy your modifications to your hearts content, just stop trying to ruin the game for those that do not support them.

I understand your point of view Twotribes, but games *do* evolve, sometimes for the better and sometimes for the worse. Take for instance the Strategic Command series by Battlefront, SC I is a lot different from the latest installment "Breakthrough", most boils down to added complexity which IMHO Hubert has done very well. The CIV series I'm not so happy with, the best ...again in my humble opinion... was CIVIII, CIV IV and V gave me no joy, the added complexity did nothing for me so I stopped playing it. Again the same with the Baldur's Gate series, the first two were absolutely stunning, groundbreaking, after that they ruined the game by making it a hack and slash action RPG. There is indeed a fine line between "improving" a game without destroying gamefun. But, sofar Vic has done a great job.

Along these lines, when the "leaders" bit was being proposed as a new feature being added to ATG, it was my request and hope that they would end up being optional changes. My question is, if I upgrade to the latest patch, am I stuck with officers games only ? I have not updated ATG since before the officers patch and won't if I cannot easily switch off the officers mods. Can someone who has it running tell me if it's possible to avoid officers with the latest patch ?

The leaders mod, as well as the alternate graphics mod, are different PTMASTER files. So, you can go with ATG as it was or one of these two, not a combination.